Cultural capital is only for the wealthy...

[Explodingatomickittens]

I feel that the kids who are really gaining cultural (& on another level social capital) are from wealthy families. I know people will reply that there's lots of free events on all over the UK daily. In my experience these spots are always nabbed by the mc also. Due to covid & cost of living crisis the gap is widening between tremendously between the haves & the have nots. It's very sad.

There are lots of interesting points on this thread. I agree that China's cultural revolution (ie stamping on those with cultural capital) did not work too well. However I can understand why a terrible communist regime might try that to root out privilege. It was the same in places like Iran and Iraq (and the programme I was watching last night about Jews who lived in Iraq who with other liberals there enjoyed country clubs set up by the British back in the day, obviuosly women not veiled, even muslim ones etc until those regimes out there decided to, in my view, throw the baby o ut with the bathwater and return women to the dark ages and impose the cultural values of fundamentalist islam.

The point above that a privileged person might improve their cultural capital by doing down and dirty with the working classes as it were is interesting. Certainly you have to consider the recipient of your application/UCAS form, even back when my oldest children were applying we thought their principal hobby of riding their own horses and skiing might not go down too well with an impoverished left with university academic so played that down/ didn't mention it. Ideally if you can have something everyone might like that will build common ground so whether you talk about your classical music, rock band, chapel choirs, football and rubgy (to catch both classes of men or indeed women) and your woke left stuff to brandish your up to the minute ESG halo will depend on the setting for that exercise.

I do remember as a child in Newcastle when we went away for the first time ever when I was 10 (even first night away from the house!!) when we went on a package to Ibiza at Easter how life changing that was as I experienced the different culture, even just the heat of the place opened my eyes, church amongst only Spaniards when out there was interesting too. Simialrly on the one skiing holiday with the school on which I was sent - that experience in the mountains of Norway - one week, which I adored led to my taking the family when children were 4/6/8 and many a skiing holiday since. Obviously you don't need skiing to have cultural capital any more than any one thing of course.

My grandparent met in the Newcastle theatre Royaal where we went to plays and opera as children so I certainly fee also being in a house of books etc we had a lot of this kind of stuff and probably similarly provided a lot to my children and now the grandchildren.

What is also interesting living where I do where most people are not from the UK (and in a minority white London borough) that the new cultures around us are here and how that has an impact - if most people are hindu, say, my cultural capital as a Christian might be different etc etc. I hope my parents gave us as I have tried to give my children a vast amount of information and ability to communicate with and find things in common with people of all cultures.

Another point above was that of the "predominant" culture. I have certainly been a work things in the City with men where given I hate watching any sport I found it a bit of a struggle to keep up with boring sports chat. I don't think most of the most successful careers in London require you to do a whole load of the cultural capital stuff on this thread but it is just knowing about it and being able to say something that helps. I doubt any one could care less that Mr X sings in the Bach Choir or Ms Y owns a horse.

Either way, Bordieu is surely a bit outdated now and a late 70s/80s/90s concept?

I would have thought some concept of psychological/social capital is more relevant these days. Who is still emotionally and socially well balanced enough to navigate society in the 21st century and make the most of their own privilege/lack there of. Kids being happy and supported by their family, wider family and community is more relevant, in my opinion.

Agree with others that it's less about money than it is about parental attitude. DH's sister, her husband and family live close to a major city with excellent free museums and galleries. People travel from other parts of the UK to see the Liverpool maritime museum, or cathedrals, or Walker Art Gallery, or Museum of Liverpool. These places are very close to them but it would no sooner cross their minds that it might be an idea to take their kids to the museum than it would to fly to the moon. Just not on the radar. Not for "people like them". Museums and galleries are dull, boring, a waste of time.

There is no hope for people like that really.

Oh, for the love of God Xenia, I hope that diatribe about China wasn't for my benefit?

There's nothing wrong with various cultural activities/ hobbies/ interests being favoured by one class or another but using it as a language to crowd out the others - to decrease social mobility in society - to benefit yourself and your children is not only morally suspect it diminishes opportunities for economic growth.

Now, where's that hammer? I'm going to the library.

A lot of museums / exhibitions are free! It was Thatchers era when she started charging for them, but that’s stopped again now. Even during Thatchers era we went after 4pm when admission was free. Some paying museums do times when it’s free.
All of them where I live are all the time.
Going to the theatre is a real struggle financially.
But if you’re near/ in London during August theatres do a deal if you have kids. Still pricey though, but a big saving

The interesting point is whether it is morally wrong to say one set of cultural features is superior to another (which is a separate point from whether people should choose to be foolish (where they have a choice) as to have nothing in common with those who might help them make money and get on).

I suppose it doesn't matter if the ballet is superior to a different kind of dance or rugby better than football or whatever; but simply whether adopting the culture of those whom you want to emulate as that might get you a job or the husband you want or so other thinks you are better or whatever the reason, is fine or it is a sell out, giving in to the dominant culture in that particular place.

Even in my mother's day things like if you went to grammar school you, in effect, were changed, made different frmo your parents, then left for university, became the Other but perhaps for your benefit (but may be to your detriment in some ways). Perhaps we simply need to give teenagers choices so they can then make an informed choice about whether they will choose to change.

Depends where you live too. Tony remote Welsh village- you'd be lucky to access a library, let alone concerts museums without a major effort transport wise.

No, I have no objections to individuals playing the game. I'm just pointing out that it is rigged. Which means that we see plenty of - Tim nice but Dims- cruising into well paid positions of power and influence that may be better suited to individuals who lacked the cultural capital that simply oozes through the walls in monied homes or is tactically acquired by motivated social chameleons.

My main problem as a single parent has been being time poor. You simply can't be working, looking after house, food shopping, taking several children places all at the same time. Free events are great but you have to have time to take them. Two parent households have more time as household jobs can be shared.

Xenia I agree on the point of being changed by a school sometimes if it doesn't reflect your home life.

I think that uses to happen far more though when grammar were an actual tool for social mobility. Of course they took away the in house school support so now it's purely down to parent's so those with no parents support have no chance so no chance to change whether they want to or not.
The ones with parents support are not going to change they will simply be more like their parents.

Tumble you don't have to take them anywhere nowadays.... Just books/films... world issue's... podcast's!

Im still new to the world of podcast's and I've found some amazing books stuff eg BBC sound's so I've played some classic books.
Or talks from authors about all sorts, a wonderful one the other day was Napoleon in gardens!
Play this in the car on one way school drop off.

You can, over years, acquire an entire world of education from BBC Radio 3 & Radio 4. They were probably my main source of entertainment - aside from reading - as a teen during the holidays when my parents were at work.

Came on to say this.

I'm not sure why 'cultural capital' has become synonymous with days out...

Perhaps because it conjures up images of cathedrals etc in capital cities?

Telling your children fairy tales so they understand how those stories can be played around with and alluded to in literature... Greek myths for free on storynory app... buying a nature spotters guide in a charity shop and identifying species when you take a walk... and conversation conversation conversation.

Cultural capital is everything. For DS it was variously going to watch Southend United with his grandad. Crabbing and rockpooling, being in am drams, learning to be a life guard, volunteering with st Johns, being an army reserve, the library, using Duolingo, eating a meal for every team in the world cup, writing constantly to poor bloody Tony Blair and getting replies, bludgeoning sir teddy Taylor into giving him a tour of the houses of parliament yada yada. Nothing cost anything really. We told him these opportunities existed and he picked them up and ran with them.

That's a good way of looking at it. Reading your children the classic children's books. Making sure they learn to speak a foreign language. Giving them the opportunity to take part in amateur musical theatre (which is amazing in the UK, and is an entry to both theatre and music), letting them sing in a decent choir (choral music is also very good in the UK), letting them take up a musical instrument and join a band or orchestra, the same with a sport, encourage an interest in art and maybe pay for a few lessons. They may not want to do all of these things, but you can give them the chance to try them and decide what they enjoy. I think debating is useful, too. Some of these things cost money, but not very much money. Most of them are free. One of them even pays the child.

Love this. A rich, curious, active life is what we all want for our children.

What is sad is children with a “not for the likes of us” attitude which I witnessed when helping out with dds primary class years ago 😌

Forcing them to go to a church with beautiful music (which are free of charge) too is another one. However all these things take the moral judgment that the dominant "elite" culture is the best. i think it is but I can see a view point that says it is just as good to sit at home every night stuffing your face watching TV and never reading to your children. Who is to say which is of most moral good? This FT article raises some of the issues on.ft.com/3jr7m26.

I certainly think children do better when they have more choices so exposing them to a range of things can be worthwhile even if they just pick on one of those hobbies or interests as the one they like, or choose none of them.

I don't think you nee to go out to museums all the time (which, come on, can be very boring in my view..... laughing as I type.,,, )

Is that what you think parents are doing when they aren't "forcing" their children to attend church? Sat on their arse watching television with their children?

You don't think that they might have leisure pursuits and musical tastes that could simply be different and as rich and as rewarding than those revered by those who consider themselves culturally elite?

Honestly not sure what you point is here.

Free tickets for a specific event via Eventbrite are available to anyone who wants to apply for them (unless categories are restricted).
If you don't get into one event then look for others to attend, look at the wealth of culture available online and via tv and radio - even libraries are online these days.

The views of Bordieu are a bit dated now, they largely define culture as "what the middle classes do" rather than address the concept itself.

This has been an interesting thread to read and ponder on. What I dislike is the idea that cultural capital has to relate to what was traditionally considered "high" art eg opera etc. It saddens me that reading your child Greek myths or taking them skiing is somehow more worthy than reading Winnie the Pooh, and taking them walking in the woods. This perpetuates the idea that only the elite are fit to govern us (hence the old Etonian tory boys that have run the country into the ground - but heyho at least they can quote some random Greek or Roman god or something).

I am not of the opinion that culture has to be the extremes of either Opera or Love Island either - there is a wealth of inbetween.

I have been lucky enough to have the means to take my DC to the Natural History Museum, the Science museum etc (but only once as we are a considerable distance from London) and also to go on days out to places that I have wanted to see and they have reluctantly been dragged to (largely because they have been promised a nice lunch and a trip to the gift shop). We are by no means wealthy but I suppose because of my upbringing (again, not wealthy but solidly MC) these have been 'normal' childhood experiences.

Although brought up with the same experiences, one of my DC loves quiz shows especially University Challenge (and is regularly amazed that the students on there are clueless when it comes to "popular" music) whilst the other is hooked on Love Island.

I am well aware that there are plenty of cultural activities that we haven't been able to give them but they are also luckier than most in that they have had music lessons and been able to join clubs that they have been interested in.

I think I've probably lost my train of thought now and am just rambling but I do think we have to question what exactly passes for culture in the 21st century , why we still value the elite forms of culture so much more than the everyday and why there is so little value placed on the everyday. I suppose by keeping some things inaccessible to the masses, they retain their power as elitist therefore propping up the class system and making it harder for social mobility.

SimonandGarfunkel, it certainly has been interesting. I grew up in a working class family, as did many of my friends. I'm not sure why things were so different 40-50 years ago in that many WC families seemed to access and hunt out ways of learning about the world.

You mentioned University Challenge, I think that's a great example. We used to watch it as a family, also Mastermind, lots of nature documentaries, R4 was on a lot, we were subject to classical music and jazz, we helped in the garden, went to the library weekly, DDad had a subscription to a monthly encyclopaedic magazine which we all read and he used to pick up 2nd hand copies of National Geographic which were pored over for weeks.

When we had days out it wasn't to shopping centres or theme parks, it was walking in the countryside or a visit to somewhere interesting - not necessarily a beautiful historic town, but somewhere with fascinating industrial heritage.

Currently there seems to be such an emphasis on 'pop culture'. Love Island/Bakeoff/EastEnders etc are entertaining and a psychologist would probably be able to articulate why they're important because they help us understand the human 'psyche' but we don't learn much about the amazing world we live in from them.

Cultural capital is not about wealth. I grew up in a very UMC family but my DCs were not so fortunate as I was a permanently broke single mother. I passed on all my knowledge through reading, watching and listening to the classics, educational programmes and only very occassionally attending cheap or free events. I don't live in London, Edinburgh or any other significant city so have had very limited access to museums etc but we have used holidays to go to historic places in the UK or France (very cheap). It is about prioritising culture and education, talking about current affairs and other places at home and discussing everything we read, watched or listened to. By the time my DC were teenagers, they had excellent levels of general knowledge and could hold a serious debate on most subjects with any adult.

We missed out on a lot of other things - television was mainly restricted to educational programmes, classical drama and films, music in the car was classical rather than pop, there were no beach holidays, no trips to theme parks (other than the excellent Puy du Fou in France), no computer games or shopping trips, etc. It wasn't a hardship as I wasn't interested in that type of modern culture although of course the DCs started listening to pop music once they reached their teens but by then, the cultural background is well-established. Cultural capital is not something you can decide to provide to your DC. It comes naturally, it is not forced. If you would prefer to watch a football match than a polo match, you are unlikely to be able to persuade your DC that they want to do the latter every week.

The main issue is that the parent needs to have cultural capital in order to pass it on to the child. This is why social mobility is so difficult, nothing to do with money. It can't be easily bought. But likewise, cultural capital is no longer a passport to a better paying job. In fact, I have decided that I would have been better off training as a plumber or electrician rather than spending years in academia!

I wasn't saying high art etc is better and TV = bad. I was really just trying to raise the issue of why do most people on the threat think X is good and Y is bad. Do we think there are objectively "better" things? (leaving aside that certain interests might help you get certain jobs or a spouse)

Is Winnie the Pooh (which I love) better than another children's book and how do we decide that and is that better than the TV and if so why?

Interesting. We were pretty poor when I grew up in the 70s and 80s. Blue collar family, rented accommodation etc.

BUT. We lived in London, so galleries, parks, exhibitions were free ( or very cheap). I could read by the time I went to school as my family were prodigious readers. What I guess you'd call working class intelligentsia, to a degree. I was always at the library, the school library or swapping books with friends. I would read anything.

Discussions round the kitchen table, radio 4 on in the background, classical music as well as pop. Open University programmes on the telly. I went to Sunday school.
^
My father was the first person with a university education in our family ( he put himself through the Open University) when he was in his 40s. He went on to get a PhD. He didn't use it to further his career, he just enjoyed the mental challenge.^
^
I was never told that something wasn't suitable, so I read and watched things that were sometimes completely incomprehensible, but must have gone in at some level. I was lucky that my father would talk to me about anything. He was a self taught man but he was endlessly curious about the world around him.^

Like a PP, I was au fait with Mythology, the Classics, Biblical imagery and texts which made school a doddle. I wasn't academically inclined as I favoured the arts, but school ( comprehensive in a fairly run down area) was an absolute breeze in that respect. Not so maths, no-one in my family likes maths

I have friends now who had the same working class upbringing as I did but whose parents were uninterested in the wider world and so didn't read, go to galleries or show any interest in politics.

My friends haven't been able to pass along the same wealth of knowledge to their children , and although they can afford to send their children to private schools, and pay for them to attend every class under the sun, join clubs and visit every gallery in existence, it doesn't always bear much fruit culturally or intellectually because intrinsically it's not of any interest to the parents, who are, to an extent, just 'buying' their education rather than sharing it with them.

Reading is key.